A comparison of some population density sampling techniques for biodiversity, conservation, and environmental impact studies

Twelve terrestrial and marine studies were conducted at various sites in Malaysia, Brazil, and the United States between April 1999 and February 2004. These data were analyzed using five density estimate techniques for stationary (non-motile) organisms including Stratified Random Sampling, Point-Center Quarter, Third Nearest Object, Weinberg, and Strong. The Strong method gave the most accurate density estimates of stationary animals and plants. Stratified Random Sampling ranked second best and the Third Nearest Object the third best. Belt or strip transects may be preferable but can be restrictive in some situations because of logistics and associated time constraints. Straight line measurements on reefs were 3–27% more accurate than reef slack line and reef contour measurements. Most study areas measured with the standardized Morisita index of dispersion were moderately aggregated. Results from the Third Nearest Object and Point-Center Quarter techniques indicate that the addition of more data to establish a density correction factor does not necessarily give more accurate estimates of density.